This past weekend, Bonnie and I traveled a few hours north to attend the wedding of a friend.  As we often do, we took the back roads (the road less traveled) to see more of the scenery.  We came through a little town with a population of 575.  As we were going through town I noticed a Church of Christ sign in front of a little white brick building on the left.  Then we turned at the town intersection and drove a few blocks where I saw another Church of Christ sign in front of a little red brick building on the right.  This building did not have any rooms outside of the main building so we decided it must be the “anti-Sunday school” church in town.  It made me think of just about every other small town in the state of Texas .  Very few have just one Church of Christ .  We’ve even got three in our small town—and that’s not because we are growing in any way.  In short, it’s because of the way we have chosen to interpret scripture. 
My last post was called “Greet One Another With a Holy Kiss”.   In it, by using one of our methods of interpretation, I was able to prove that we must “greet one another with a holy kiss” and that no other greeting was authorized or acceptable.  The argument (or method of interpretation) I used to prove that is usually employed to prove that we are authorized (and even commanded)(twice) to “sing” and that we are therefore not authorized to clap or use an instrument or any other “noise maker” in our worship and that to do so would be sinful.  My goal in posting this was to illustrate what happens when we substitute some other command that God gave (5 times in this instance) into this method of interpretation.  Using the exact same arguments in the exact same way seems to demand the same type of conclusions—that holy kissing is the only authorized method of greeting.  And yet, for some reason, we have not chosen to follow this interpretation on this particular command.
Then it dawned on me that the reason we have two and three Churches of Christ in every little town is because we just can’t agree on which topics should be interpreted using this specific method of interpretation.  Some say it should apply to the fact that no “Sunday School” is authorized in the Bible and therefore it is wrong to have one.  Some say it should apply to the fact that Jesus said to take “this cup” rather than “these cups” during the communion and therefore to use more than one cup is sinful.  Some say that the Bible says to “sing” and therefore anything other than singing with our voices is wrong.  Some say that “youth ministers” or “family life centers” or “kitchens in the church” are wrong.  Each one on the ”conservative” side of the argument says that because the other church (on the liberal side of that particular argument) disagrees with them on their specific issue(s) that they cannot fellowship with them because that would be tolerating error and “liberalism”. 
I say that whatever method we use to interpret scripture should apply to all of the topics or none of the topics.  Can you imagine Jesus or the apostles standing up and preaching and saying “Thou shalt apply this method of interpretation to some of the commands I give you.”  That would leave us saying, “Jesus, to which commands shalt we apply this?”  How silly is this.  And yet that is the idea we have adopted—to apply it to selective commands, because we surely don’t apply it to all the commands.  We only apply it to a select few.  Others apply it to a different select few.  They can’t tolerate us because they think we picked the wrong few.  This is insanity.
The bottom line is that this method of interpretation is flawed if we can’t apply it to every command.  In fact, if we can’t apply it to every command, then it is divisive.  We should abandon this method for a better one—one that we can apply to all commands and all examples and all “necessary inferences”.  Then we can be unified instead of divided (as we now are).  What I believe is the better method is described in my “ Better Way” post of August 2, 2007.  I hope you will read it and carefully consider its contents.  If you don’t agree with it then let’s talk about it.  God Bless us both as we seek his way.  Dennis 

Exodus 21:16 “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.  [17] “Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.     [18] “If men quarrel and one hits the other with a stone or with his fist and he does not die but is confined to bed, [19] the one who struck the blow will not be held responsible if the other gets up and walks around outside with his staff; however, he must pay the injured man for the loss of his time and see that he is completely healed.

Ex 26:30 “Set up the tabernacle according to the plan shown you on the mountain.     [31] “Make a curtain of blue, purple and scarlet yarn and finely twisted linen, with cherubim worked into it by a skilled craftsman. [32] Hang it with gold hooks on four posts of acacia wood overlaid with gold and standing on four silver bases. [33] Hang the curtain from the clasps and place the ark of the Testimony behind the curtain. The curtain will separate the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place. [34] Put the atonement cover on the ark of the Testimony in the Most Holy Place. [35] Place the table outside the curtain on the north side of the tabernacle and put the lampstand opposite it on the south side.

Deut 22:1 If you see your brother’s ox or sheep straying, do not ignore it but be sure to take it back to him. [2] If the brother does not live near you or if you do not know who he is, take it home with you and keep it until he comes looking for it. Then give it back to him. [3] Do the same if you find your brother’s donkey or his cloak or anything he loses. Do not ignore it.     [4] If you see your brother’s donkey or his ox fallen on the road, do not ignore it. Help him get it to its feet.     [5] A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.     [6] If you come across a bird’s nest beside the road, either in a tree or on the ground, and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young. [7] You may take the young, but be sure to let the mother go, so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life. 
   [8] When you build a new house, make a parapet around your roof so that you may not bring the guilt of bloodshed on your house if someone falls from the roof. 
    [9] Do not plant two kinds of seed in your vineyard; if you do, not only the crops you plant but also the fruit of the vineyard will be defiled. 
    [10] Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.     [11] Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together.     [12] Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear.

There was no doubt about what he wanted them to do. Or was there?  Through the years the Pharisees would have great discussions about how to uphold various phases of the law.

Regarding the Sabbath Regulations the Pharissees had debates over various matters—“could a man wear a wooden leg on the Sabbath?  Was it lawful to eat an egg laid on the Sabbath?  Some knots could be tied or untied on the Sabbath, but not others.  Vinegar, if swallowed, could be used to relieve a sore throat, but it could not be gargled.  No woman was to look in a mirror on the Sabbath lest, seeing a gray hair, she might be tempted to pull it out.” (from A Church That Flies, Tim Woodroof, page 103)

The reality was and is that no one was able to keep the Law perfectly, except Jesus Christ.

DID THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL OBEY THE LAW?   NO!!  WHY NOT?

Romans 9:31 but Israel , who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it.

Romans 3:23   for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

James 2:10  For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

They didn’t keep the law and neither can we. AND THAT WAS PART OF THE PURPOSE OF THE LAW—to lead us to Christ

Galatians 3:24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. [KJV]  Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

It did that by making us conscious of sin.

Romans 3:19-20  Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. [20] Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

SO WHAT DID GOD DO WITH IT?  He set it aside.

Hebrews 7:18-19 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless [19] (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

WHY WOULD GOD GIVE US A LAW THAT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO OBEY????   Because he wanted us to come to the realization that we can not do it alone.

Romans 3:27-28     Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. [28] For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.

Galatians 2:16   know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

NEW TESTAMENT WORSHIP REGULATIONS
As we turn to the New Testament, God did NOT give us a book or a chapter that gave us the regulations for worship.  He left it out.  Why do you think he did that?  Do you think that was by accident?  Do you think God might have forgotten to include a detailed list of worship regulations?  Or did he leave it out on purpose?  Ponder that question in the days ahead.  Why didn’t God give us a detailed list of regulations for our New Testament worship services so that we could easily know what is okay and not okay to do? 

Hebrews [9:1] Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. [2] A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand . . . [10] They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings–external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

“APPLYING UNTIL THE TIME OF A NEW ORDER.”   THE NEW ORDER IS HERE.  EXTERNAL REGULATIONS DON’T APPLY ANY MORE AS A MATTER OF SALVATION. 

INSTEAD, GOD, WHO GAVE US 92 PAGES OF EXTERNAL REGULATIONS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND WHO EMPHASIZED THEM REPEATEDLY HAS NOW IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, DONE EVERYTHING HE CAN TO DE-EMPHASIZE EXTERNAL REGULATIONS.

John 4:21-24  Jesus declared, “Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem . [22] You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. [23] Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. [24] God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”

Romans 8:1-2     Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, [2] because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.

2 Cor. 3:6  He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant–not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Once again, GOD, WHO GAVE US all THESE EXTERNAL REGULATIONS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND WHO EMPHASIZED THEM REPEATEDLY HAS NOW IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, DONE EVERYTHING HE CAN TO DE-EMPHASIZE EXTERNAL REGULATIONS.

Since God did not give us the detail commandments and regulations in the NT, some of our well meaning brethren about 200 years ago decided that we should worship according to the 1^st century pattern.  We should see what they did and do it ourselves.  So they scoured the New Testament and used commands, examples and necessary inferences and made a new list of worship regulations.  Then, as time went on, some of our brethren decided that if you don’t follow this specific list of new regulations, then God is going to send you to Hell.     

My question is, “if God chose to NOT give us external regulations for worship, why should we create them ourselves and bind them on ourselves and others?”  Doesn’t it make sense that if God wanted to bind us to the 1^st Century pattern that he would have given us the specific list of worship regulations as he did in the Old Testament?  

The truth is that we, as human beings, like to have a specific checklist that we can rely on.  But God doesn’t want us relying on a check list.  He doesn’t want us relying on external regulations.  And that is what we have a tendency to do—rely on following a checklist so we can feel sure that we qualify because we have followed all the rules. 

But GOD DOES NOT WANT US RELYING ON A LIST OF RULES AND REGULATIONS.  HE WANTS US TO RELY ON HIM!!!

Galatians 2:16     know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

Romans 8:2  because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. He has set us free from those regulations. 

And in fact, he warns us that if we try to be justified by following the regulations that we have fallen away from grace.

Galatians 5:1-6     It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.  [2] Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. [3] Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. [4] You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. [5] But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. [6] For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

What God wants from New Testament Christians is faith expressing itself through love.  So I say let’s free ourselves from the bondage of relying on our regulations for worship.  It’s not about the regulations.  Its about the heart.  I’ll have more soon.  God Bless.  Dennis

Using the Example methodology, generally speaking, has to do with the goal of many of our brethren to restore the “pattern” of the 1^st century church.  We have held that if the first century church did it, then we should do it even if it was not specifically commanded (unless it had to do with customs and their culture, then we could modify it to meet our culture).  Conversely, if they didn’t do it, we shouldn’t do it.  We should follow their example and do it exactly like they did it.  To do it any other way is a sin. 

There are quite a few verses that seem, at first glance, to support this type of view of interpretation.  Some are as follows:

John 13:15 (NIV)      I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.

1 Cor. 10:1-11 (NIV)      For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. [2] They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. [3] They all ate the same spiritual food [4] and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. [5] Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert.    [6] Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did. [7] Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written: “The people sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in pagan revelry.” [8] We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did–and in one day twenty-three thousand of them died. [9] We should not test the Lord, as some of them did–and were killed by snakes. [10] And do not grumble, as some of them did–and were killed by the destroying angel.     [11] These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.

1 Cor. 11:1 (NIV)      Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.

Philip. 3:16-17 (NIV)      Only let us live up to what we have already attained.     [17] Join with others in following my example, brothers, and take note of those who live according to the pattern we gave you.

2 Thes. 3:6-9 (NIV)      In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us. [7] For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, [8] nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. [9] We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to make ourselves a model for you to follow.

1 Tim. 1:15-16 (NIV)      Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners–of whom I am the worst. [16] But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.

1 Tim. 4:12 (NIV)      Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity.

Titus 2:7 (NIV)      In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness

Hebrews 8:5 (NIV)      They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”

But, upon close inspection, it becomes obvious that these have little, if any thing, to do with doctrine or how the 1^st century church did “worship services”.  These examples that we are to follow are about how Paul and Christ and others lived their lives.  And we should, indeed, follow their examples and live Godly lives. 
But when it comes to using this method to interpret the Bible I have a few questions about it.  For one, which part of an example is binding on us today? 

In Acts 2:43-47 (NIV) the scriptures tell us,   “Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. [44] All the believers were together and had everything in common. [45] Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. [46] Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, [47] praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.”

The example they left us was to sell our possessions and goods and to give to every one as they have need and to meet together every day in the Temple courts.  Is any part of that example binding for us today?  Why or why not? 

When Phillip was going to teach the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:27), he ran up to the chariot.  Is that example binding—about running up to the person we are teaching?

When you look at what the early church did with the money that was collected in the contribution, it was only used to help the poor and the needy in the local as well as the other churches.  Paul also talked about how he, as an evangelist, had the right to receive compensation and he talked about how an Elder who worked full time was worthy of “double honor” (honor as in “respect” and financial support as well).  And yet today we use the church contribution for many more things than the first century church did (the congregation where I attend even contributes to the local voluntary fire department).  Is not the example of how the early Christians used the church contributions in the first century binding to us today?  If not, why not?

It is good for us to see examples of what the early church and it’s leaders did.  It helps us understand what God wants from us.  But, as you can see, we don’t use it consistently as a method of interpretation because even trying to decide which part of the example we should follow is difficult. 

Furthermore, an example implies that there is more than one.  In other words, an example illustrates one way to execute a principle, but not necessarily the only way.  A Ford is an example of an automobile, but the implication is inherent that there is more than one type of automobile.  Therefore, we cannot use an example as our one correct method of interpretation to determine exclusively what to include or exclude when interpreting God’s word.  It is just an aid.  It is just an example, but not necessarily the only example that would be acceptable to God.

Stay tuned.  We’re making progress.  God Bless.  Dennis

Method # 2—Custom vs Command

There are several things that were specifically commanded (repeatedly) in the New Testament that we do NOT do in the Church of Christ today.  We justify our actions (or lack of same) by saying that the command was given based upon the customs in the 1st Century and that since the customs have changed, those commands no longer apply to us today or that something else, a modern day equivalent, is substituted in their place.  It’s kind of like the “get out of jail free” card in Monopoly.  It’s a “get out of command” card.  I’ve never figured out just how to determine if something was a permanent command or a custom/culture command.  They look pretty much the same to me.  Read below and see if you agree. 

A.  HOLY KISS   For example, there are five specific times where the New Testament writers told the 1st century Christians to “Greet one another with a holy kiss”  (Rom. 16:16 ; 1 Cor 16:20 ;  2 Cor. 13:12 ; 1 Thes. 5:26 ;  1 Pet. 5:14).  We do not greet one another with a holy kiss, but instead, shake hands.  We say that it is a matter of custom, and therefore we don’t have to do the holy kiss.

B.  LIFT UP HOLY HANDS   1 Tim. 2:8 says, “I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing.”  Would it be okay to do this in our assembly Sunday morning?  I don’t think we could lift up our hands in prayer in the assembly without drawing some criticism, even though it was common practice in days of old.  Why is that?

C. HEAD COVERINGS–  “Man should uncover his head & woman should cover her head when praying or prophesying.”  1 Cor. 11:2-10  Based upon this text, isn’t the requirement for woman to have her head covered more than just a cultural situation or custom?  v 3 says, “. . .the head of every man is Christ, and the head of every woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.”, then verse 7 says “A man ought not to cover his head since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.  8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.  10 For this reason, …the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.”  Then in verse 16 Paul seems determined when he says “If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.” 

In spite of the apparently strong reasons for the command, we have deemed it as a custom that has changed.  We generally have used the basic principle that in those days, when a woman took her head covering off, it was a sign of loose morals and sexual promiscuity.  The shaved head indicated that the woman either had been publicly disgraced because of some shameful act or was openly flaunting her independence and her refusal to be in submission to her husband.  Having no head covering today does not indicate those bad things, therefore, the requirement no longer applies. 

[side note 1: verse 5 (Does this mean that it is okay for a woman to pray or prophecy in the church if her head is  covered? ]

[side note 2:  Was he talking about the need for women to wear these head coverings only in the assembly--or anytime they were in public?)]

QUESTION:  Can we use and apply this basic philosophy of interpretation (described above) everywhere in the New Testament?  If not, how do we know when we can use this method of interpretation at all?  How do we know when it is custom and when it is still binding?

Lets look at the issue of instrumental music in light of this method of interpretation.  Keep in mind that our purpose right now is not to decide if instrumental music is okay or not.  If you are concentrating on that, you will totally miss the point of this post.  Our purpose right now is to examine our methods of Bible interpretation to see if we are being consistent in our Bible study. 

We all know that during Old Testament times, instrumental music was acceptable to God.  David often used the instrument in his praises to God(Psalms 92:1-3; 1 Chr. 25:1; Psalms 4; 1 Chr 23:5).  When he was having the Arc of Covenant brought back to Jerusalem, he told the leaders of the Levites to appoint their brothers as singers to sing joyful songs, accompanied by musical instruments:  lyres, harps and cymbals. (1 Chron. 15:16). 

Then for some reason, when the New Testament was written, the saints were told to “sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God” (Col 3:16), and in Eph. 5:19 they were told to “speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.  Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord.”  In these verses there was no mention of a mechanical instrument. 

Could there have been a cultural reason for this exclusion which was similar to the reason for women’s head coverings?  Listen to what some church historians have to say about it and decide for yourself:

                E.S. Lorenz - Church Music:  “Singing, (there was no instrumental accompaniment) was little more than a means of expressing in a practicable, social way, the common faith and experience. . . The music was purely vocal.  There was no instrumental accompaniment of any kind… It fell under the ban of the Christian church, as did all other instruments, because of its pagan association.”

                Alfredo Unterseiner - A Short History of Music:  “It was exclusively vocal, for the Christian had an aversion to instruments which served at pagan feasts.”

                Dr. F.L. Ritter - History of Music From The Christian Era to The Present Time:  “Instrumental music was excluded, at first, as having been used by the Romans at their depraved festivities; and everything reminding them of heathen worship could not be endured by the new religionists.”

                Edward Dickinson - History of Music:  “. . .while the pagan melodies were always sung to an instrumental accompaniment, the church chant was exclusively vocal.”

Is it not the case that just as uncovered heads meant an association with loose morals, instrumental music indicated association with pagan festivals?  And if so, if it is acceptable to change the practice of head covering when that association disappeared, would it not also be acceptable to lighten up on our condemnation of those who use instrumental music when it no longer represents pagan feasts?  IF NOT, WHY NOT?

AND ONCE AGAIN, HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT WAS CUSTOM AND WHAT IS BINDING?   DO WE HAVE A CONSISTENT OVERALL METHOD OF INTERPRETATION? If we assume that the correct method of interpretation is the method we discussed last time (“God Means What He Says”), then the following must be true: 

            a)  Women must wear head coverings (or at least long hair) in the assembly, and 

            b)  We must sing in the worship services without instrumental music.

However, If we assume that the correct method of interpretation is the method we are discussing today(customs and the culture of the day), then the following must be true: 

            a)  Women are not required to wear head coverings in todays culture, and 

            b)  We are not necessarily required to sing without the instrument in our worship services today.

Soon I will post Method #3 of our interpretation of the Bible.  (This could get confusing.  Or maybe I should say that the way we have been doing it is confusing.)  I’ll also post what I think is the one correct method—the best way— of interpreting the Bible so that we don’t have to keep switching around to find the right answers.  Till then, God Bless.  Dennis

 We, in the Church of Christ, sometimes without realizing it, have used several methods of interpreting the scriptures which has led us to various conclusions based upon whatever method we have chosen to use.  On any topic, if we would have used one of our other methods we would come up with a different conclusion.   Furthermore, we sometimes don’t even carry the methods we choose out to its complete and logical conclusion.  Read the following to see what I mean as we discuss 

METHOD #1:  GOD MEANS WHAT HE SAYS!
We have traditionally used a few scriptures to prove that God “means what he says.”  These verses give us much comfort and confidence if we take a legalistic view of God’s word.  They seem to have a very cut and dried, black and white, undeniable message for us today.  And that message is “Do exactly what God says—– or else.”  Some examples of scriptures we’ve used to prove our point are as follows:

A.  TOUCHING THE ARK OF THE COVENANT 

           1.)1 Chron. 13:9 …Uzzah reached out his hand to steady the ark, because the oxen stumbled.  10  The Lord’s anger burned against Uzzah, and he struck him down because he had put his hand on the ark.  So he died there before God. 

              2.)  1 Chron.15:2,12,13 …you and your fellow Levites are to consecrate yourselves and bring up the ark of the Lord, the God of  Israel, to the place I have prepared for it.  13 It was because you, the Levites, did not bring it up the first time that the Lord our God broke out in anger against us.    We did not inquire of him about how to do it in the prescribed way. 

               3.)  Ex 27:7The poles are to be inserted into the rings so they will be on two sides of the alter when it is carried. (Also  Ex 25:14)

B.  ANNANIAS & SAPHIRA 

            1.)  Ex.20:16  You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor (Lev 19:11 Do not lie, or deceive) 

                2.)  Acts 5:1-11  Annanias and Saphira lied about their gift at the alter & were struck dead for it.

C.  REMEMBER THE SABBATH (Ex 20:8-11; Deut 5:12;Jer 17:21-22(carry no load);) 

            1.)Ex 31:14-15  Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you.  Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death;(also Ex 35:2-3)

                               a.  VIOLATION–Numbers 15:32-36,  A man gathering wood on the Sabbath.  Moses, after inquiring of the Lord, said he must die.  They stoned him outside the camp.

                                b.  VIOLATION–Exodus 16:26  Gather manna six days but not on Sabbath– they found no manna on the Sabbath.

(Following these examples we say “God means what he says and when we fail to follow his commands completely, we are condemned—without exception.)

GOPHER WOOD—I’ve often heard it said that if Noah would not have used gopher wood, like God said, then the Ark would not have floated, or stayed together.  When God said “gopher wood” he meant “gopher wood” and nothing else.  Therefore, when God said to sing and make melody in your heart, he meant “sing.”  Any other action or addition to this action is the same as gathering wood on the sabbath, and anyone who does it will be condemned.
If you preach a sermon based upon the information above you can have the conservatives really on the edge of their seats with “joy” while condemning instrumental music, clapping, and various other activities.
The only problem with that argument is that it doesn’t look at the whole picture.  In addition to the above examples, where violations resulted in severe punishment, there were also several times where people violated these aforementioned commands and did not reap the same punishment as the people did in these examples.  In fact, some times they violated these commands with positive results.  And yet, these exceptions are rarely mentioned by the person trying to prove we should do what he thinks we should do in the NT example and they are never included in the conservative preacher’s sermon when he is trying to condemn the aforementioned activities. 
Let’s look at some of the exceptions I just mentioned as we begin to put some of the pieces of the puzzle together to learn how to interpret God’s word correctly. 

Annanias and Saphira lied & died, but

Josh 2:1-7  Rahab the Harlot lied as she hid the two spies of Joshua and was a hero of faith in Heb. 11:31

God said, “Do no work on the Sabbath,” but,

JESUS & DISCIPLES DID THINGS ON THE SABBATH 

            a.  Luke 13:10  Jesus healed on the Sabbath. 

            b.  Mark 2:23-28  Jesus & disciples pick grain on Sabbath   “Sabbath is made for man–not man for Sabbath.(v27)” 

            c.  Mark 3:1-6  Jesus heals on the Sabbath.

EATING OF BREAD OF THE PRESENCE 

           1.)  Lev. 24:9 to be eaten only by the priests 

           2.)  1 Sam 21:4  David ate this bread when he was at Nob and was running from Saul. 

            3.)  Jesus uses this incident to illustrate the principle that the ceremonial law was not to be viewed in a legalistic manner.  Matt 12:3-4;  Mark 3:25(in dispute about picking grain on Sabbath) (I desire mercy, not sacrifice Hosea 6:6, Micah 6:8)

WOMAN CAUGHT IN ADULTERY 

            1.)  Deut 22:23-24; Lev 20:10 If a man or woman were caught in adultery, they were to be put to death.

            2.)  John 8:7 Woman caught in adultery and brought before Jesus.

            3.)  John 8:11  He does not condemn her.

So what are we to gather from these scriptures?  Is it sending mixed messages?  Why is there such a difference in the consequences for these various acts of disobedience?  We traditionally have used some of these verses (first half) to justify our condemnation of others, but when we look at all of them together, it seems that we may have been over anxious in our condemnation.  It seems we have had a tendency to pick out the verses that justify what we want to do or say (have we not?), instead of looking at all the verses to try to find out how God wants us to be.  Of course God wants our obedience.  I’m not saying he doesn’t.  Of course he does.  But I believe that we have sometimes heard a different message than the one he is sending.  Real proof of this is in Micah 6:6-8 where it appears that God is not satisfied with what it appears he specifically asked for.  It’s clear that even if we get every detail right, but have the wrong attitude and mindset, then it is not pleasing to God?  More than our obedience, doesn’t he desire our hearts?  (Heb. 10:22  “let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith,”)  We’ll talk more about this later.

Please pray for this study as we try to come to God’s word with open hearts and open minds to learn what he has in store for us. 

About the time I was in college a game came out called Twister.  It consisted of a large vinyl or plastic sheet that you spread out on the floor.  This sheet had dots that were about 6” in diameter and of various colors spread out across the sheet.  It also had a couple of little spinner wheels (if I remember correctly).  One of them was on a sheet that was divided into 4 parts with labels of “left hand”, “right hand”, “left foot” and “right foot”.  The other was on a sheet that listed the colors “red, green, yellow and blue.”  The object of the game was to spin each wheel and then place the selected body part on the selected color without letting any other part of your body touch the floor.  You could only move the hand or foot that the spinner landed on and you could not pick it up again until the spinner told you to.  To spice the game up you could have several people on the same vinyl at the same time.  This game would make you contort your body into all kinds of knots and positions.  It was quite interesting and it was a good icebreaker game.  I’ve even seen it used for large groups (like college orientation) where the whole gym floor is covered with a hundred sheets (or more) and one person tells everyone which hand or foot for which color.  Using the instructions correctly your body does things it would not normally do. 
It reminds me of the way that I learned how to interpret the Bible for the first 30 or 40 years of my life.  As I was studying and trying to understand God’s will for me and as I discussed various topics with people who believed differently than me it began to dawn on me that we, in the Church of Christ, use different methods of interpretation for different topics in the Bible.  This comes as quite a shock to my more conservative brethren when I point this out and they get a little perturbed at me (to put it mildly).  It also dawned on me that “Bible classes” were not so much about learning what the Bible teaches or God’s will for us as they were about learning which methods of interpretations we were supposed to use for the various topics (kind of like Twister) and how to use them properly to come up with the orthodox answer.  This, when pointed out, also perturbs my more conservative Brethren.  Many of them get very upset with me.  They don’t want to hear this “disrespectful” and “divisive” gibberish.  In fact, some of them get down right ugly.  That’s a shame. 
Others, however, are anxious (in a positive way) to examine what I’m saying and are invigorated (or reinvigorated) with the energy that comes with epiphanies and with learning.  It is for those of you with this zeal for understanding God’s will that I want to re-examine the lens through which we have been studying God’s word.  I want to look at each of the methods by which we have been interpreting the Bible and I want to look at the shortcomings and the inconsistencies of those methods.  And then I want to sum it up with what I consider to be the right way to really understand what God’s will is for us.  I know that some are saying that I am being so arrogant with these statements.  I’m sorry you feel this way.  I hope you can just keep me out of the equation and look at the words that I write on this blog.  See if what I’m saying is so.  If not, you can always respond in the comment section and point out the flaws.  I’m going to call this series (probably about 5 parts) “Understanding God’s Will”.  I’ll post part 1 soon.  May he bless us all as we prayerfully consider these things.  Dennis